655321

What about the other Robson/Segal way: (d) Partner has made a take-out double, then RHO bids one of the unbid suits

I don't think so.

That was my main complaint in my thread on this topic. The Butler scores for each pair are all on one page, and the team name is there for each pair too.

I bet it is a problem when you jump to 3 with a 5 card suit and make 8 tricks, when the other table jumped to 2 and also makes 8 tricks.

Lucky! The times I have accidentally shown around 27 points (e.g. 7 diamonds, all the Aces, around 19HCP, I doubled the robot's opening and had to choose between shown 12+ points or about 27 points, depending on how many diamonds I bid, forgot the exact auction, sorry) Gib has always grabbed his opportunity and bid a no-play 6NT with his handful of quacks, instead of passing or raising my suit.

Seems unlikely, don't you think OP would have mentioned it if they were playing something so unusual?

I am not sure that the ♣8 helps us, playing a club to the 8 seems to give us no more than ducking a club completely unless I am missing something. Maybe in real life it is possible to lead the ♣8 to the ten, sneaking it past the QJ, but I am going to ignore that sort of thing for now as I find it hard to estimate the chances, and just look at the pure technical lines. These seem to be (1) Duck a club (e.g. play a club to the 8), and (2) duck a diamond. Ducking a diamond works when the ♦QJ are short, or when they are not short but the hand with 4 or more diamonds also holds 4 or more clubs. Ducking a club works when clubs are 3-3, and perhaps (but only if the opponents return a major suit) a crisscross squeeze if one opponent holds the length in both minors, and you can pick it. Without doing all the numbers, 3-3 clubs alone looks better than the combined chances from ducking a diamond. QJ short diamond is only 1 of the 5-2 combinations and QJx is only 5 of the 4-3 combinations. Then, the chances of clubs not being 3-3, and the long clubs being with the long diamonds should also be relatively small. If these chances really do total less than the 36% for 3-3 clubs, then playing on clubs is best, and it only remains to decide how to play clubs. Playing a club to the ten at trick 2 should only cost when West has QJ doubleton, so maybe it is worthwhile because certainly East will sometimes play low from QJxx. (Forgot about including QJ of diamonds not short, clubs 3-3, but QJx club with the long diamonds, really I need to do the numbers to be sure that playing on clubs is better, sorry.)

3♥ and pass. Bidding looks normal to me at any form of scoring. But we are w/w at MP, passing and submitting to -110 or more has to be particularly bad.

The Wednesday Bulletin is on the website now, it has the scores even though the results page on the website is still blank.

1♥, could live with double but it is not for me with 35 in the majors, and hate 2♣ which seems to be a complete masterminding bid for no reason.

If partner is lighter in HCP with a singleton or void heart, then: Opponents are quite likely to make 4♥X, Opponents are relatively likely to take the push to 5♥. Passing 4♥X seems to put all your eggs in the 'partner is strong and balanced (and we don't make anything)' basket, and strikes me as being fairly naive, regardless of OP's guess that some tables in the English Premier League may have done this.

Why did partner not ask for keycards immediately over the 1♦ response? He is the one who knows he has solid clubs, and he also knows he doesn't want to defend 4M.

Read all the replies (except one) and agree with rogerclee too.

1♥ looks normal to me, don't like pass or 2♥.

I like 2♥ then 5♣. I don't like to have a 6th major suit card for a Michaels type bid if it can be avoided. The hand is strong and it is void in their suit, I would not sell out to 4♠ no matter whether the first bid was 2♥ or 2♠ (or 4♥ :)).

Is there a way to actually see all of the participants in an event on one page? The teams link lets you select a country, but when you pick a team from that country all that happens is an HTML error. Even for the links that work (e.g. Open Pairs) you can only see players from one country at a time. Edit, OK I found the 'All' option in the countries dropdown, but I still get HTML errors when trying to see who is playing in a team, and would still like to be able to go directly to a page with all the player's names!.

:blink:

This can be rephrased as 'Partner likely has a doubleton heart', and I disagree with that. To double 1♥ then 4♥ partner is much more likely to have distribution, including very short hearts. Most hands with a doubleton heart won't act again.

I am a simple soul, I have 18 so I don't open a 15-17 NT, sorry if that offends the K&R fans.

I think he is using hanp's revolutionary new notation.

That is the one level, not the two level, and consequently responder (because if he has responded very light he should be unbalanced) usually has a rebid, and by ripping this double responder lets opener (with a strong hand) know most of his hand. I am claiming that even if it is possible for partner to unilaterally double something at the two level (and after a 1M response to 1m I don't think it is) it is so unlikely that in practice it is not a concern, I don't remember it ever happening. Whereas Rob's point is valid, sometimes partner does jump to 2NT and we get a bad result.

Or doubles them at the two level expecting that you have some values... Sounds like nonsense to me, what is this auction where partner (a) wants to make a penalty double at the 2 level after a simple response, and (b) has a penalty double available? Anyway, needing 6 points to respond is a good general rule for balanced hands, although there are times you might bid with less. But with unbalanced hands, you can bid on less, with 5 spades and a singleton you often want to respond 1♠ instead of passing. But the motivation for bidding is not the negative 'to take partner out of 1m', it is a combination of positive reasons such looking for a good fit (with a big fit and some shape, you can take a lot of tricks without many points), making it harder for the opponents to enter the auction, etc.

As the auction went, I would pass. I don't like double, and I would want to be stronger/have some immediate tricks to bid 3NT. But I don't like the 1♦ opening at all, even with the methods to show 45 in the red suits after a 1♦ opening. I don't want to show an unbalanced 45 hand of indeterminate strength, I want to show a balanced 15-17.

Bidding 2♦ then 3♦ on partner's hand is terrible. This concept, that bidding the hand twice, giving opponents more room, more options is bad is not a difficult idea, and you posted this in the correct forum.

Disagree quite strongly with 2♠, this should show a good hand, and we don't have a good hand. After that, I can understand all of South's later passes, hoping nothing bad will happen, but something bad did happen. In case this is a hesitation problem I wouldn't ever pass the double, but really I abstain because of the original overcall.